You guys really need to fix these ship challenges. They are way too **** hard. I had a star on tier 2 ability materials before the ships 2.0 update and now i cannot beat it at all. Every single one of my ships are starved of ability materials both the blue ones and prestige i cannot upgrade my ships because you broke the challenges and STILL have not fixed them. This NEEDS to be hotfixed like **** 3 weeks ago! ****!
is the only answer of the defender of this ships1.0.0.1 desaster (also known as ships2.0) change your fleet?
so now please tell me how i should change my fleet in tb or tw? i usually won 4 fleetbattles in tw (using all the 4 capships) now i don´t... moreover i never ran in timeout in ships1.0, in ships 1.0.0.1 i do (with endurance)
i never lost a fleetfight since tb were invented, now i do although my ackbar and all the other rebell starfighter pilots are much stronger than last year (invention of tb)
changing fleet is not the answer to this ships1.0.0.1 rubbish... and the most annoying thing is: all the bugs/problems reported to individual ships before ships1.0.0.1 were forced upon us aren´t solved... and all the new bugs that are now online since this ships1.0.0.1 garbage (like tie silencer now feeds the 8%TM to the opponent not to himself or that scimitar doesn´t target lock incoming reinforcement any more... to mention only 2) is on air will also not be solved until pigs can fly^^
and if you still say "change fleet" ... no sir, i want to play the game with all my ships and toons (in tw for example)
i bet the ships1.0.0.1 trash will cost several (or maybe all) guilds many stars and special mission ge-token (chimeras special mission)
BTW, what are you running in fleets, if I may ask.
My leaderboard lives and dies by Thrawn, it seems, so I'm using Home One as my capital ship right now. Ackbar was g9 when 2.0 hit, but I've been working on him and he's nearly g12 now, but maaaaaaan do I hate those gold stun guns... I've also been working on Thrawn and Tarkin, but they're still only g8/9 because of how many Thrawns I'm up against.
My starting three are Biggs, Vader, and 5s. I use 5s because he's very fast and his target lock is guaranteed if it hits.
My reserves are Jedi Consular, Poe, Clone Sgt, and use my fourth as a flex that is currently Asohka, but has been basically everything.
My leaderboard is very basic, so it's mostly Thrawn, Vader, Biggs, Imperial TIE, with Boba and Scimitar as their first reserves. So I open up by hitting their Biggs with 5s' special for a guaranteed target lock, that will push their Biggs' TM above their Vader's, so he uses his basic instead of his special and my Biggs will survive. Home One uses its AoE and all ships always attack their Biggs until he's dead. If their Biggs survives until Home One's next turn I'll bring in Jedi Consular and use his special to have him and Vader finish Biggs off. If their Biggs is dead or very low on life, I bring in Poe and either one-shot their TIE or finish off their Biggs with Poe's basic and save the special for the TIE.
From there I'm in a good position and usually go on to win, but the exact moves to get there are fuzzy because the situation is always different.
That's good enough to gain rank, but I'm kind of busy lately so I don't have time for more than a handful of attacks each day So I've broken the top 100 (which isn't that impressive, I know, but my only g12 pilot is Poe, and my omegas and reinforcement abilities are spread all over the place since I've been trying different things out) but have fallen pretty far back. I think I'll have enough time to commit by late July or early August, but my job is weird.
I'm working on the Geonosian trio because they seem really solid, but I'm ready for everything to change once the pve board comes out. I have an idea for a really wicked Resistance fleet, but it needs at least one more Resistance ship, a tank that isn't Biggs, and would be better with a Resistance capital ship, but can get by with Home One. But, for now, it's all just a work on paper.
Thank you for sharing Nic.
I've seen success with Bistain too under Mace, and some here say under Akbar. It's a nasty little ship when maxed; Rex-like and everyone here should know what Rex-like means. Bistain is also a guaranteed TL. So he could be swapped for 5s as another option.
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
@Dark_Light I'm stepping out of this conversation because you're not willing to listen. Take care.
See, above
Bye
I would say bye back, but I don't think you're being sincere. If you want to win the argument, that's OK. I pronounce you the winner. No biggie.
I did win, by defending everyone’s opinion, and characterizing them as such. Something some of you are unwilling to do.
So let me get this straight. We're all talking about 'opinions' here, which can't be right or wrong. And you feel you won? .
The definition of opinion is not debatable, and for that reason no one’s opinion is right or wrong, it is simply someone’s opinion. My original comment was to imply people should stop trying to change each other’s opinions, and it led to me having to explain what an opinion is to the point I had to give a dictionary description. I feel like I won if you learned today what an opinion actually is because that means I taught someone something and perhaps made the world a slightly better place. And p.s. you will always be my huckleberry.
Fair enough. You gave a good description of your opinion on opinions. Here's my opinion, I skated easy peazy to 1st place, and didn't drop below 16 the past week in an aggressive active shard. So I'm quite happy being a winner and all.
Congratulations, I wish you continued success, I also as previously stated finish first still, for like 2 years now, Glad they made some other pilots useful again, still don’t like the update.
Fair enough. We're winners together, proving anyone can win in Ships 2.0 validating my opinion as being based on solid facts.
Except we didn’t do anything together, you didn’t prove anyone can win and you’re opinion is yours no matter what it’s based on (like the “facts”, or lack thereof), other than that, we’re in total agreement.
I guess I lost haha. Have a good night. Happy Father’s Day.
I've made my points, but you refuse to listen. I tried to show you the path to happy gaming, but can't help you anymore than that. You can choose the red pill, or the blue pill, and you chose the red. You're on your own.
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
BTW, what are you running in fleets, if I may ask.
My leaderboard lives and dies by Thrawn, it seems, so I'm using Home One as my capital ship right now. Ackbar was g9 when 2.0 hit, but I've been working on him and he's nearly g12 now, but maaaaaaan do I hate those gold stun guns... I've also been working on Thrawn and Tarkin, but they're still only g8/9 because of how many Thrawns I'm up against.
My starting three are Biggs, Vader, and 5s. I use 5s because he's very fast and his target lock is guaranteed if it hits.
My reserves are Jedi Consular, Poe, Clone Sgt, and use my fourth as a flex that is currently Asohka, but has been basically everything.
My leaderboard is very basic, so it's mostly Thrawn, Vader, Biggs, Imperial TIE, with Boba and Scimitar as their first reserves. So I open up by hitting their Biggs with 5s' special for a guaranteed target lock, that will push their Biggs' TM above their Vader's, so he uses his basic instead of his special and my Biggs will survive. Home One uses its AoE and all ships always attack their Biggs until he's dead. If their Biggs survives until Home One's next turn I'll bring in Jedi Consular and use his special to have him and Vader finish Biggs off. If their Biggs is dead or very low on life, I bring in Poe and either one-shot their TIE or finish off their Biggs with Poe's basic and save the special for the TIE.
From there I'm in a good position and usually go on to win, but the exact moves to get there are fuzzy because the situation is always different.
That's good enough to gain rank, but I'm kind of busy lately so I don't have time for more than a handful of attacks each day So I've broken the top 100 (which isn't that impressive, I know, but my only g12 pilot is Poe, and my omegas and reinforcement abilities are spread all over the place since I've been trying different things out) but have fallen pretty far back. I think I'll have enough time to commit by late July or early August, but my job is weird.
I'm working on the Geonosian trio because they seem really solid, but I'm ready for everything to change once the pve board comes out. I have an idea for a really wicked Resistance fleet, but it needs at least one more Resistance ship, a tank that isn't Biggs, and would be better with a Resistance capital ship, but can get by with Home One. But, for now, it's all just a work on paper.
Thank you for sharing Nic.
I've seen success with Bistain too under Mace, and some here say under Akbar. It's a nasty little ship when maxed; Rex-like and everyone here should know what Rex-like means. Bistain is also a guaranteed TL. So he could be swapped for 5s as another option.
Yeah, I want to work on Bistan, but there's just so much else to work on first... It's the good kind of frustrating where you have too many options. Like getting too many presents on a holiday and knowing you'll just have to open some of them tomorrow.
The cool thing about Bistan's U-Wing is that it's slow on paper until you factor in the Pathfinder's unique, then it's on the low-end of fast and just has so many little utilities. Like Cassian's U-Wing, but that one you need to bring in from reserves, and under the right circumstances when you DO bring it out, woooooo, goodNIGHT.
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
@sipi22 It was an Executrix lead, and a slightly faster one, but it wouldn't have mattered much if mine were faster. All of the called assists and additional damage just shredded the Tie Advanced (which now appears to be favored for targeting purposes ahead of all other ships). I believe the optimal capital ship to run the triplets with is the Home One because of the protection received when attacking out of turn.
Thanks for the extra info @cannonfodder_iv .
Yeah, I've been working on my Geos for a backup TW squad, but might have to give them a go once they are 7* g10 or so. They do look interesting, but who knows if they'll be better / worst with any changes from the PvE tables as well (more ability mats would mean they are easier to max though and their abilities are awesome).
BTW, what are you running in fleets, if I may ask.
My leaderboard lives and dies by Thrawn, it seems, so I'm using Home One as my capital ship right now. Ackbar was g9 when 2.0 hit, but I've been working on him and he's nearly g12 now, but maaaaaaan do I hate those gold stun guns... I've also been working on Thrawn and Tarkin, but they're still only g8/9 because of how many Thrawns I'm up against.
My starting three are Biggs, Vader, and 5s. I use 5s because he's very fast and his target lock is guaranteed if it hits.
My reserves are Jedi Consular, Poe, Clone Sgt, and use my fourth as a flex that is currently Asohka, but has been basically everything.
My leaderboard is very basic, so it's mostly Thrawn, Vader, Biggs, Imperial TIE, with Boba and Scimitar as their first reserves. So I open up by hitting their Biggs with 5s' special for a guaranteed target lock, that will push their Biggs' TM above their Vader's, so he uses his basic instead of his special and my Biggs will survive. Home One uses its AoE and all ships always attack their Biggs until he's dead. If their Biggs survives until Home One's next turn I'll bring in Jedi Consular and use his special to have him and Vader finish Biggs off. If their Biggs is dead or very low on life, I bring in Poe and either one-shot their TIE or finish off their Biggs with Poe's basic and save the special for the TIE.
From there I'm in a good position and usually go on to win, but the exact moves to get there are fuzzy because the situation is always different.
That's good enough to gain rank, but I'm kind of busy lately so I don't have time for more than a handful of attacks each day So I've broken the top 100 (which isn't that impressive, I know, but my only g12 pilot is Poe, and my omegas and reinforcement abilities are spread all over the place since I've been trying different things out) but have fallen pretty far back. I think I'll have enough time to commit by late July or early August, but my job is weird.
I'm working on the Geonosian trio because they seem really solid, but I'm ready for everything to change once the pve board comes out. I have an idea for a really wicked Resistance fleet, but it needs at least one more Resistance ship, a tank that isn't Biggs, and would be better with a Resistance capital ship, but can get by with Home One. But, for now, it's all just a work on paper.
Thank you for sharing Nic.
I've seen success with Bistain too under Mace, and some here say under Akbar. It's a nasty little ship when maxed; Rex-like and everyone here should know what Rex-like means. Bistain is also a guaranteed TL. So he could be swapped for 5s as another option.
That dude is in the 300's on his ship arena, he just happens to have lots of time time to write about something he has no clue about. Generally I stick to others who are at least in the top 10, if not top 50, for how to run ships, that's just me. *shrugs*
But, yeah, it's a lot of scrolling to get through those text walls. The poor scroll wheel on my mouse!
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
Also worth noting that 3 of them are facts (false or correct) and one is an opinion. @Dark_Light
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
Also worth noting that 3 of them are facts (false or correct) and one is an opinion. @Dark_Light
People still struggling to read the dictionary description @leef. I already said I lost, if people refuse the dictionary description and still choose ignorance, we all lose. There’s no fixing that.
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
Also worth noting that 3 of them are facts (false or correct) and one is an opinion. @Dark_Light
People still struggling to read the dictionary description @leef. I already said I lost, if people refuse the dictionary description and still choose ignorance, we all lose. There’s no fixing that.
Semantics is the last bastion of someone who knows they’re wrong but is too proud to admit it.
You should atleast keep the old system for ship Tb.The current ships 2.0 is too RNG reliant.
I'm in a decent guild (135m GP) but even still less than 15 people could finish the p6 mission.1 wave is a really bad design considering it awards so many points and the people not completing it, including myself,cost us a star.
Ps:hate the fleet arena now as well, it's worse than ever before despite keeping the same rank.
Increase time requirement for ships: Check
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
Also worth noting that 3 of them are facts (false or correct) and one is an opinion. @Dark_Light
People still struggling to read the dictionary description @leef. I already said I lost, if people refuse the dictionary description and still choose ignorance, we all lose. There’s no fixing that.
Semantics is the last bastion of someone who knows they’re wrong but is too proud to admit it.
How can I possibly be wrong? You’re one of 3 who refuses the description of a word out of the dictionary, I’m not even offering my description of the word I offered the language used in the dictionary, and you refuse it, it’s ok, you can’t fix st..., never mind.
A quote from Ken Ewell, researcher, theorist, developer, says it best.
"Show your friend your opinion is based in fact and is reasonable. That makes it valid. If your opinion is not supported by (concrete) facts, or if your argument linking the facts to your (inferred) conclusion (opinion) is logically unsound or otherwise unreasonable, then it is invalid.
Your assertion that "opinions can not be invalid" is untrue. To be held valid (and warranted) an opinion must be upheld by facts, and/or laws and arguments. Courts issue opinions. Consultants charge for their opinions. The Appraiser's opinion is required in the sale of real property. In all cases, these 'opinions' can be overturned on submission of new facts into evidence.
Your friend's opinion is based on the facts and arguments that you presented to him. You can overturn his opinion by presenting new facts into evidence and clarifying your argument about how the evidence leads one to the conclusion (your opinion)."
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
meh, forum ate my comment.
Point was that you can be wrong if your opinion is based on incorrect or incomplete facts.
Again, word for word out of the dictionary.
o·pin·ion
əˈpinyən/Submit
noun
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
"I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance"
synonyms: belief, judgment, thought(s), (way of) thinking, mind, (point of) view, viewpoint, outlook, attitude, stance, position, perspective, persuasion, standpoint; More
the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing.
"the changing climate of opinion"
an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something.
"I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved"
"opinion
Contrary to what many people who add 'definitions' here think, Opinion is not the same as Definition. Opinion is the usually biased twisting of facts based on someone's viewpoint. Definition is impartial fact."
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
My time interacting with ships has increased by 36% between 1.0 and 2.0.
On my shard, the top 50 used to be a pretty decent mixture of capital and fleet ships. In 2.0 there is an uneven distribution of only 2 capital ships, and their fleets would make you forget there are more than 10 piloted ships in the game. Overall, perceived decrease in variety.
In 1.0, if I won a battle previously, there was a very high probability that I would win again against the same opponent. In 2.0, my win percentage is around 65 percent against opponents previously encountered. Using fleets suggested to mitigate RNG sees around a 15% win rate, on my shard. Overall, my experience is that there is an increased reliance on RNG.
Adding those 3 things together, my overall experience with ships has gotten worse. I didn't enjoy it before and I enjoy it even less now. So, bad update, which is an opinion based on true facts derived from my experience.
For the most part, the people who post on these boards have their minds made up the second they type their first "I hate this."
...
I'm replying because this board has more lurkers and than it has active posters, and there are lurkers out there who aren't posting because these threads become great circle jerks of negativity where everyone is competing to see who can bash it the most, then as soon as someone says "Well I like it," they're met with "LET ME TELL YOU WHY YOU ARE WRONG!" And why should they? You guys said what you had to say--RNG, limited options, don't want to farm new ships, blah, blah, blah and then I or TVF or the occasional other random poster would reply to you. Then you would repeat yourself, only louder, because your mind is made up and the idea that someone disagreeing with you might have a point is so foreign that clearly they only disagree because they don't get what you're saying.
...
I've posted my criticisms of 2.0 here, the other thread, in Feedback, all over the place. I'm not saying this is perfect. The last patch was a good starting point, but it's just a starting point, there's a whole lot more that needs to be done. But no one wants to talk about that, because that would mean acknowledging that you aren't 100% right. So it's much better to just repeat RNG for the umpteenth time like that's adding something new to the conversation despite all the times folks have said that you can control for randomness if you want, and relying on it is your strategic choice.
So... I hate this ( ) change as a whole, but Nic is totally right about his first point... there are more options in ships 2.0. That's not what most of the complaints are about though. The RNG, 3v3, fight times going up (but that's not so much an issue as it is picking on the devs for one of their stated goals), and heavy nerfs make up the majority of the (valid) complaints. Those saying there's less diversity than before... Hey, every shard is different, mine is mostly running mirror matches still, but there are indeed more ways to skin the cat now. No matter what I've run though (everything but Mace because I refuse to gear him as he's garbage), it's still heavily RNG dependent and I've not found a lineup that I ENJOY playing as much as my old 1.0 lineup. None that perform as well, or as consistently either.
The second of Nic's comments... You TVF and the cap guy (apologies, forgot your whole name) SHOUT about how much you like these changes and how everyone who doesn't ENJOY it is wrong. How is what you're doing better than the complainers? Just your own three-way circle **** as far as I can tell.
And finally, I haven't seen you make any complaints/raise any issues in these threads. But you and cap keep saying you can control RNG - I've tried a dozen plus iterations of capital ship/starters/backups (yes even your Ackbar squad) and keep running into rando RNG (ship squads i'm competing against are generally 380-405K). Almost certainly this is just my personal confirmation bias, but the RNG is MUCH more pronounced for me personally in 2.0 in general and especially when I'm going from 7-1 than 20+down to 7. Ship strength being equal - even facing the same ships in those slots. I hit one Mol Eliza in particular who's a tough matchup no matter what and always has been. When he's above 7, I beat him every time. When he's under, I usually lose. Nothing's changed except our relative ranking. I find that bizarre and extremely frustrating. Again, probably just me being more aware of RNG issues at those ranks, but just to illustrate my point... please don't tell me RNG isn't an issue or you can mitigate RNG to nil. That may be your experience (valid), but it's not mine (still valid).
Would you mind joining a more constructive conversation (than 'hey man, that's just like, your opinion') and share what your issues are? What would you like to see done?
Back when TB's launched and there were tons of issues, a group of officers pooled together our ideas/requests and started a thread proposing changes. CG didn't do them all, and some got oddly perverted into other things (still not loving that mandatory 3* lock CG and the inability to lock specific platoon squads... but I digress), but many of them were adopted. Let's do the same here. What do you want and lets ask for it. Again.
*edited because the quote box was messed up.
So you can be wrong if you state something as a fact, but your opinion isn’t wrong, it’s just yours.
In the future when someone says you're wrong, but you can't be because it's an opinion, just assume they're saying you're wrong about the reasoning/facts to support said opinion.
"i don't like the rolling stones because i don't like hip hop music"
I may not like the stones, but with that reason given i'd probably have to give it another listen before my opinion has any value whatsoever.
I want more starting ships, more ships introduced to the game, more capital ships introduced to the game, less nerfs, more word comprehension from forum users, and greater acceptance of peoples opinions.
I don't care how much you hate Ships 2.0, you can't hate it more than a discussion about what an opinion is.
It’s a discussion, the word is literally in the dictionary available for all to read. Some people can’t compregend the word and I tried to explain it to them, I’m done trying, they don’t understand it, that’s fine, moving right along.
I don't care how much you hate Ships 2.0, you can't hate it more than a discussion about what an opinion is.
It’s a discussion, the word is literally in the dictionary available for all to read. Some people can’t compregend the word and I tried to explain it to them, I’m done trying, they don’t understand it, that’s fine, moving right along.
I keep seeing posts about "I'm done" and then I come back the next day and there's two more pages of arguments about how opinions work. I don't care what you think about opinions, I don't care what anyone else thinks about opinions. It's irrelevant to the topic.
So you can be wrong if you state something as a fact, but your opinion isn’t wrong, it’s just yours.
In the future when someone says you're wrong, but you can't be because it's an opinion, just assume they're saying you're wrong about the reasoning/facts to support said opinion.
"i don't like the rolling stones because i don't like hip hop music"
I may not like the stones, but with that reason given i'd probably have to give it another listen before my opinion has any value whatsoever.
See, you get it, it doesn’t have to based on knowledge or facts, that’s why it can’t be right or wrong, it’s just yours.
Replies
so now please tell me how i should change my fleet in tb or tw? i usually won 4 fleetbattles in tw (using all the 4 capships) now i don´t... moreover i never ran in timeout in ships1.0, in ships 1.0.0.1 i do (with endurance)
i never lost a fleetfight since tb were invented, now i do although my ackbar and all the other rebell starfighter pilots are much stronger than last year (invention of tb)
changing fleet is not the answer to this ships1.0.0.1 rubbish... and the most annoying thing is: all the bugs/problems reported to individual ships before ships1.0.0.1 were forced upon us aren´t solved... and all the new bugs that are now online since this ships1.0.0.1 garbage (like tie silencer now feeds the 8%TM to the opponent not to himself or that scimitar doesn´t target lock incoming reinforcement any more... to mention only 2) is on air will also not be solved until pigs can fly^^
and if you still say "change fleet" ... no sir, i want to play the game with all my ships and toons (in tw for example)
i bet the ships1.0.0.1 trash will cost several (or maybe all) guilds many stars and special mission ge-token (chimeras special mission)
Thank you for sharing Nic.
I've seen success with Bistain too under Mace, and some here say under Akbar. It's a nasty little ship when maxed; Rex-like and everyone here should know what Rex-like means. Bistain is also a guaranteed TL. So he could be swapped for 5s as another option.
I've made my points, but you refuse to listen. I tried to show you the path to happy gaming, but can't help you anymore than that. You can choose the red pill, or the blue pill, and you chose the red. You're on your own.
Decrease diversity in ship arena: Check
Increase reliance on RNG: Check
Make an already bad section of the game worse: Check
I'm not sure who what their focus group for these changes consited of, but I suggest changing it up. Maybe include some actual human beings if they don't already.
The cool thing about Bistan's U-Wing is that it's slow on paper until you factor in the Pathfinder's unique, then it's on the low-end of fast and just has so many little utilities. Like Cassian's U-Wing, but that one you need to bring in from reserves, and under the right circumstances when you DO bring it out, woooooo, goodNIGHT.
See, this is what I was talking about earlier. These are all points that have been made ad nauseum, and their counterpoints have been repeated ad nauseum. One or two people have evolved their positions along the dialectic, but for the most part the solution has been the same--say it again, but say it louder and hope no one notices you're just repeating.
Thanks for the extra info @cannonfodder_iv .
Yeah, I've been working on my Geos for a backup TW squad, but might have to give them a go once they are 7* g10 or so. They do look interesting, but who knows if they'll be better / worst with any changes from the PvE tables as well (more ability mats would mean they are easier to max though and their abilities are awesome).
That dude is in the 300's on his ship arena, he just happens to have lots of time time to write about something he has no clue about. Generally I stick to others who are at least in the top 10, if not top 50, for how to run ships, that's just me. *shrugs*
But, yeah, it's a lot of scrolling to get through those text walls. The poor scroll wheel on my mouse!
Also worth noting that 3 of them are facts (false or correct) and one is an opinion. @Dark_Light
People still struggling to read the dictionary description @leef. I already said I lost, if people refuse the dictionary description and still choose ignorance, we all lose. There’s no fixing that.
Semantics is the last bastion of someone who knows they’re wrong but is too proud to admit it.
I'm in a decent guild (135m GP) but even still less than 15 people could finish the p6 mission.1 wave is a really bad design considering it awards so many points and the people not completing it, including myself,cost us a star.
Ps:hate the fleet arena now as well, it's worse than ever before despite keeping the same rank.
How can I possibly be wrong? You’re one of 3 who refuses the description of a word out of the dictionary, I’m not even offering my description of the word I offered the language used in the dictionary, and you refuse it, it’s ok, you can’t fix st..., never mind.
Point was that you can be wrong if your opinion is based on incorrect or incomplete facts.
Finally, common sense.
"Show your friend your opinion is based in fact and is reasonable. That makes it valid. If your opinion is not supported by (concrete) facts, or if your argument linking the facts to your (inferred) conclusion (opinion) is logically unsound or otherwise unreasonable, then it is invalid.
Your assertion that "opinions can not be invalid" is untrue. To be held valid (and warranted) an opinion must be upheld by facts, and/or laws and arguments. Courts issue opinions. Consultants charge for their opinions. The Appraiser's opinion is required in the sale of real property. In all cases, these 'opinions' can be overturned on submission of new facts into evidence.
Your friend's opinion is based on the facts and arguments that you presented to him. You can overturn his opinion by presenting new facts into evidence and clarifying your argument about how the evidence leads one to the conclusion (your opinion)."
Again, word for word out of the dictionary.
o·pin·ion
əˈpinyən/Submit
noun
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
"I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance"
synonyms: belief, judgment, thought(s), (way of) thinking, mind, (point of) view, viewpoint, outlook, attitude, stance, position, perspective, persuasion, standpoint; More
the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing.
"the changing climate of opinion"
an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something.
"I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved"
"opinion
Contrary to what many people who add 'definitions' here think, Opinion is not the same as Definition. Opinion is the usually biased twisting of facts based on someone's viewpoint. Definition is impartial fact."
The problem you have, is you don't listen, that's my opinion based on what you've written. Your words are my facts.
Now, back to ships 2.0 being dumped on us without anyone wanting or needing it...
On my shard, the top 50 used to be a pretty decent mixture of capital and fleet ships. In 2.0 there is an uneven distribution of only 2 capital ships, and their fleets would make you forget there are more than 10 piloted ships in the game. Overall, perceived decrease in variety.
In 1.0, if I won a battle previously, there was a very high probability that I would win again against the same opponent. In 2.0, my win percentage is around 65 percent against opponents previously encountered. Using fleets suggested to mitigate RNG sees around a 15% win rate, on my shard. Overall, my experience is that there is an increased reliance on RNG.
Adding those 3 things together, my overall experience with ships has gotten worse. I didn't enjoy it before and I enjoy it even less now. So, bad update, which is an opinion based on true facts derived from my experience.
I’m reading what you’re writing it just doesn’t make any sense, based on accurate definitions of the language being used.
So... I hate this (
The second of Nic's comments... You TVF and the cap guy (apologies, forgot your whole name) SHOUT about how much you like these changes and how everyone who doesn't ENJOY it is wrong. How is what you're doing better than the complainers? Just your own three-way circle **** as far as I can tell.
And finally, I haven't seen you make any complaints/raise any issues in these threads. But you and cap keep saying you can control RNG - I've tried a dozen plus iterations of capital ship/starters/backups (yes even your Ackbar squad) and keep running into rando RNG (ship squads i'm competing against are generally 380-405K). Almost certainly this is just my personal confirmation bias, but the RNG is MUCH more pronounced for me personally in 2.0 in general and especially when I'm going from 7-1 than 20+down to 7. Ship strength being equal - even facing the same ships in those slots. I hit one Mol Eliza in particular who's a tough matchup no matter what and always has been. When he's above 7, I beat him every time. When he's under, I usually lose. Nothing's changed except our relative ranking. I find that bizarre and extremely frustrating. Again, probably just me being more aware of RNG issues at those ranks, but just to illustrate my point... please don't tell me RNG isn't an issue or you can mitigate RNG to nil. That may be your experience (valid), but it's not mine (still valid).
Would you mind joining a more constructive conversation (than 'hey man, that's just like, your opinion') and share what your issues are? What would you like to see done?
Back when TB's launched and there were tons of issues, a group of officers pooled together our ideas/requests and started a thread proposing changes. CG didn't do them all, and some got oddly perverted into other things (still not loving that mandatory 3* lock CG and the inability to lock specific platoon squads... but I digress), but many of them were adopted. Let's do the same here. What do you want and lets ask for it. Again.
*edited because the quote box was messed up.
In the future when someone says you're wrong, but you can't be because it's an opinion, just assume they're saying you're wrong about the reasoning/facts to support said opinion.
"i don't like the rolling stones because i don't like hip hop music"
I may not like the stones, but with that reason given i'd probably have to give it another listen before my opinion has any value whatsoever.
It’s a discussion, the word is literally in the dictionary available for all to read. Some people can’t compregend the word and I tried to explain it to them, I’m done trying, they don’t understand it, that’s fine, moving right along.
I keep seeing posts about "I'm done" and then I come back the next day and there's two more pages of arguments about how opinions work. I don't care what you think about opinions, I don't care what anyone else thinks about opinions. It's irrelevant to the topic.
See, you get it, it doesn’t have to based on knowledge or facts, that’s why it can’t be right or wrong, it’s just yours.